Is the Moon Inhabited?

reply to post by ArMaP

Definitely not a gentle slope. A 20º slope where the boulder ended up and steeper above.

Turning east, they were soon in a boulder field on the 20 degree slope at the base of the North Massif, their objective another giant rock with its trail down the mountainside where its origins could be traced to the upper levels. The rock was the largest yet visited, but could be seen to have split into several pieces where it had come to rest. Schmitt went to sample it while Cernan attended to the gravimeter.

www.bbc.co.uk...


[edit on 9/5/2009 by Phage]

And This.... What It Is?



[edit on 5-9-2009 by Imagir]

reply to post by Imagir

It's called a footprint.

reply to post by Phage


Right, Phage.
Only my wrong perspective.

reply to post by Imagir

I think that the problem, like I said in a previous post, is the resolution of the height data, so things relatively far away from each other and large have a relatively good representation, while smaller areas are more affected by bad data or lack of data.

As I said, try to look at a know place in Google Earth and you will see that their 3D representation of the terrain is nothing like the real terrain, only a good approximation for large areas.

What is this strange piece of metal?

www.hq.nasa.gov...

reply to post by Imagir

[Scott - "We made a plaque for all the astronauts and cosmonauts that had been killed. And a little figurine, a Fallen Astronaut, and we put it right by the Rover. You can see it in the picture (AS15-88-11893). That was just a little memorial, in alphabetical order. In relative terms, we had both lost a lot and, interestingly enough, we didn't lose any more after that until Challenger. That's what I was doing when I said I was cleaning up behind the Rover (at 167:43:36). Jim knew what I was doing. We just thought we'd recognize the guys that made the ultimate contribution."]

[Journal Contributor Danny Caes notes that the "Fallen Astronaut" figurine was the work of Belgian artist Paul van Hoeydonck]

[In a 2000 exchange of e-mail, Dave Scott adds "As I recall, we had the idea for the memorial and then looked around for the manner in which it might best be realized. The plaque was the obvious baseline. And either Al or Jim found van Hoeydonck. I remember meeting him at least once."]

www.hq.nasa.gov...

reply to post by Phage


Thanks for your answer Phage, and happy birthday!

At this point they are days that I am tormented the brain on the argument Moon.

Possible that in the moment of the creation of our solar system or when the Moon has been separated from the Earth, our satellite turns to the most exact speed to the millimeter to the second in way such to always show and only the same face to us?

I am to become mad!
Only a centimeter to the second in more was enough in the speed than spin that in some thousands of years we would have seen the other face: The Dark side.

Certainly that as chance is very strange one!

reply to post by Imagir

It is a matter of physics. There are many other moons in the solar system which show only one face to their planet.

Thus, the fact that the rotational period of the Moon and the orbital period of the Earth-Moon system are of the same length is not an accident. Presumably this was not always true, but over billions of years the tidal coupling of the Earth and the Moon has led to this synchronization. In the case of the Earth-Moon system the synchronization is not yet complete. The Earth is slowly decreasing its rotational period and eventually the Earth and Moon will have exactly the same rotational period, and these will also exactly equal the orbital period. At the same time, the separation between the Earth and Moon will slowly increase in just such a way as to conserve angular momentum for the entire system.

Thus, billions of years from now the Earth will always keep the same face turned toward the Moon, just as the Moon already always keeps the same face turned toward the Earth. We will encounter other examples of such tidal locking in other pairs of objects in the Solar System.

csep10.phys.utk.edu...

Thanks Phage, but I'm not convinced.

What about The Solar eclipse?

Distance Moon-Earth "1"
Distance Moon-Sun "400"
Diameter Moon "1"
Diameter Sun "400"

Too much coincidences.......... on planetary scale......!

reply to post by Imagir

The Earth's distance from the Sun is not always the same and the Moon's distance from the Earth is not always the same. Solar eclipses are not all the same. The moon does not always perfectly cover the sun.
apod.nasa.gov...

The Earth's distance from the Sun varies from 152,100,000km to 147,300,000km. The Moon's distance from Earth varies from 364,397km to 406,731km. So the ratio of the distances varies from 362 to 417, an average of 389.

The diameter of the Sun is 1,392,000km. The diameter of the Moon is 3,474 km. That ratio is 401. Not the same. Not much of a coincidence.

[edit on 9/15/2009 by Phage]

Originally posted by Imagir
What is this strange piece of metal?

It's a message to the Moon People...

"This is now our turf, We'll be Back!"

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by Imagir
What is this strange piece of metal?

It's a message to the Moon People...

"This is now our turf, We'll be Back!"

Whitout change of our paradigm, nothing manned travel out of our planet...
They have threatened us to not return on the Moon. (Apollo 13)
The moon is their dominion.
And sincerely not think that they will take very well the strafing of the
9 October 2009 .
The days to come, could be THE WORSE OCTOBER SURPRISE…New "host "in arrival and a lot angry...

reply to post by Imagir


Not to worry Space Command has it covered... we'll show those Moon Bugs who owns what

reply to post by Imagir

Hi, Imagir.

"Ingo Swann" having been a reliable source of informations,
in Stanford Research Institute, and CIA. . . and thinking he
would be hired to do PSY experiments for 3 months, and he did
it for **19 years** because he was SO good, he is another
good proof of entities on the moon, when you read:
PENETRATION
(c) 1998.
ISBN 0-966-7674-0-3

It is a 160 page PDF.

Blue skies.

There is nothing extraordinary in these photos. There are no details to point to anything but natural formations. Rocks situated on the side of hills and mountains have a tendency to roll to the lowest point because it is a fact that the Moon has an occasional Moonquake.

However, the worst part is that the poor resolution of the photos do not allow significant details to prove anything one way or another. Digital photos cannot be trusted once they become pixilated.

@Skeptical Ed

Originally posted by Imagir
What is really strange and indeed incredible it is the path of the Purple rock.
Its starting point is a pit.
It exits from the pit and climb the depression in order then to slip towards the low.

Some law of the physical does not work on the Moon…

I insist in my thesis: The "rocks" do not jump outside from the pits.
And however, this is a really stange "rock" whit geometric shapes.

reply to post by Imagir

And I insist that you should not take Google Moon as a definite source, look at real photos instead of 3D recreations.

I don't even know what data was used to make the 3D model, does anyone know?

reply to post by ArMaP


I don't know the source for the Google moon images, but even with a different source on Earth, you still have to look at photos or more accurate data than Google Earth, as this photo posted by Phage convincingly demonstrates: www.abovetopsecret.com...

People are drawing way too many conclusions about dubious 3-D projections. Look at the photos, I agree.

Trying to explain why rocks do funny things on the moon from those images might be like trying to explain why they built that road at such a steep angle, right?


[edit on 18-9-2009 by Arbitrageur]